Icon naming specification
| Project: | Icon |
| Version: | 6.x-1.x-dev |
| Component: | Documentation |
| Category: | feature request |
| Priority: | critical |
| Assigned: | Unassigned |
| Status: | active |
I've written a draft for an icon naming specification, with assistance from yoroy. It is very much inspired by the one on standards.freedesktop.org, which is very desktop oriented - but we can use it as inspiration and a reference to create one more suitable for Drupal.
This is important, as themers and developers will normally use these conventions when adding icons to their projects. The icon.module will fetch the icon from the appropriate icon set based on the icon name requested, and using the icon mapping list in the .info files of icon sets. Consistency is key, and the specification should focus on covering all areas of core. An additional contrib specification for icons in popular contrib modules may be created later.
Attached is the draft, consider this a RFC :)
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| icon naming specification.txt | 4.94 KB |
#1
Morten.dk thought it would be better if all action icons had an "action-" prefix. And I agree.
Also added the icons "action-close", "feed" and "user", removed "page" (we already have "content-page") and sorted the "Drupal concepts" section.
Any feedback to this specification is very much welcome, in particular from themers/developers/iconers! ;)
#2
I hesitate. Why repeat in naming what we're already handling through folders for each context? I agree though, that you want to easily find the action-button type of icons. But there's a simple rule for that:
- actions are verbs (cancel, move, delete)
- allothericons are nouns (nodes, files, modules, things)
hmmm, that could still get diffuse soon. ok, let's agree on only doing this for actions then! :-)
#3
I also think it's not necessary to repeat folder names in file names. This kind of undermines the point of namespaces, doesn't it?
Is there a really good reason why you'd want to do this?